politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
@fake_meows @Polderviking they cut loads of things that are a small (comparative) expense that bring in, or save, a lot of money, or support the economy. Like the national parks and USAID, and *all science*. Those new expenses won't be realised for a while but in the mean time they're paying off sacked staff left and right, paying the DOGE team, and fighting legal rulings. It's a ridiculous way of going about anything.
All of the receipts on the stupid DGE website so far have been lacking any and all context, which makes their "savings" worthless without more accounting. Okay, so they cut $1bn from one program by cancelling it, but what if that $1bn that was being spent was generating a return of investment down the road? Then they cut a service that actually ended up costing the taxpayers less than the alternative, which then needs to be recouped somehow.
I compare it to a mayor slashing the police budget because crime is at an all time low - completely ignoring that the cause of the crime being low was a well-funded police force. Shortsighted idiots should never be in charge of money.
Only the savings matter to them unfortunately.
I bet they'll defund the IRS too. Did you know that every dollar in IRS funding brings multiple dollars back to the federal budget? It'll have diminishing returns eventually, but the 1:1 point hasn't been hit. Essentially it's because IRS can catch more tax evaders if they have better funding.
Some things that just have high prices are worth it, because all the alternatives can be worse.
Yeah, its a circular economy. So for example, all your federal workers spend, save, invest and pay taxes in the country.
I think this a good small example: https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/new-report-shows-nasas-75-6-billion-boost-to-us-economy/
NASA budget is about $25B
That money (which is respent in the national economy) adds $75B to GDP. 3:1 multiplier effect.
So by finding NASA by $25B you get most of it back again in taxes AND you get all the jobs, services, technology etc. Its a huge list of benefits that is basically paying for itself. That's 300,000+ jobs and $10B in more downstream taxes...that counts against the $25B budget...it is really a net $15B tax spend to bring in $75B in GDP increase.
If you cut this program, you shrink the overall economy, drop.GDP AND lower future tax revenues. So when the money these programs spends is multiplied out through the economy in a circular way, the high price tag is a useless / pointless way to analyze the value of the return. You need to have the full systemic analysis or you're just doing damage...
This is every government program. My own small business I can track higher sales when SSI checks go out. The grocery store lines are longer and all the seniors are lining up to get groceries when the checks arrive...
And even if you "save money", what would you turnaround and do with it if not fund NASA and social security? Do they have a better idea? What else do we need that money for?
Tax cuts for the rich.